The ACT Government has opted to send light rail Stage 2B up Commonwealth Avenue to State Circle east, despite the NCA originally wanting it to go up Kings Avenue and through Barton, avoiding the Parliamentary Zone. But RICHARD JOHNSTON says we should forget it all.
The ACT Government has announced its light rail route to Woden after only recently publicly releasing its 2018 Business Case for Light Rail Stage 2.
In a CityNews column last month, I particularly noted the very low Benefits/Costs Ratio for the government’s recommended Option 2 route, meaning that the projected costs of the project were almost two and a half times the expected benefits.
The ACT Government’s original preferred route for Stage 2B was Commonwealth Avenue, King George Terrace (in front of Old Parliament House), Kings Avenue and then through Barton to Capital Circle.
At the time, the director-general of Transport Canberra told the Commonwealth Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) Inquiry into Stage 2 of the light rail project: “75 per cent of the 4437 responses it received supported a route alignment that travels through Barton and a preference for more stops in Barton to enable easy access to employment and recreational facilities.
“The overwhelming public sentiment was for the longer route because it actually takes people to places where they might want to go.”
However, the National Capital Authority (NCA) stated to the JPC that it: “does not support the proposed route alignment’s path through the Parliamentary Zone.”
The NCA submitted that “there are benefits in redirecting the route to Kings Avenue as per Griffin’s Plan, which avoids the Parliamentary Zone” and that “adopting Griffin’s approach of using Kings Avenue would ensure that the three employment centres at the junctions of the National Triangle (Civic, Russell and Parliament House) would be serviced by the light rail network”.
The JPC Inquiry report did not make a recommendation about the best route, while noting the NCA’s advice.
However, the ACT Government has now announced the route to be straight up Commonwealth Avenue (removing virtually all the magnificent, century-old trees) to State Circle east and then Adelaide Avenue, rather than going through Barton.
With no reference to cost, it says the decision follows consultation with the community and Commonwealth stakeholders as part of the project’s draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Whatever the route, it is important to question the function of a light rail service from Woden to Civic.
Is it to provide the fastest possible journey time between those two nodes at the least cost, or should it be to provide the best possible access to the main employment centres in the central area and reduce the use of private cars?
Light Rail Stage 2B will be slower than the existing express buses and, as shown in the business case, “car kms travelled in 2036” are likely to be reduced by less than one per cent.
The business case shows that “work trips by bus” to Civic from “Stage 2 Corridor” are already 23 per cent compared to only 6-7 per cent into the Parliamentary Triangle and Barton. This is surely unacceptable.
A substantial study was produced in 2015 by transport planning academics Newman & Kenworthy titled: The End of Automobile Dependence – How Cities are Moving Beyond Car-Based Planning.
They argued that city planning should aim to develop high-density residential and employment nodes – “walkable urban centres in order for them to create the intense interactions needed in the knowledge economy”.
They said: “Young people want dense, diverse, interesting places that are walkable, bikeable and transit-served.
“The mobile phone is a far more important device than a car for younger people.”
They advocate high-density mixed development nodes within a 10-minute walking area connected by fast trains with stations averaging about seven kilometres apart. Local bus routes to be integrated into the train stations facilitating very quick and easy transfers, and no “park-and-ride” facilities.
Both Sydney and Melbourne (populations around 5.5 million) are going in this direction, with high-density transit-oriented development around railway stations and further developing their rail-based “metro” systems, while Brisbane (population 2.8 million) has gone for (much cheaper) bi-articulated buses on dedicated busways.
All those cities have had to invest in metro tunnels under their central areas to cope with vehicular congestion.
It should be obvious that Canberra, with a population of less than half a million, is a long way off being able to justify such systems.
However, it already has high density residential and employment areas around Civic and along Constitution Avenue to Russell, as well as in Parkes/Barton and Kingston on the south side, and Woden Town Centre.
Let’s by all means invest in dedicated busways to better connect those areas and to Tuggeranong, Belconnen and the airport, and forget the nonsensical Stage 2B tram.
Richard Johnston is a life fellow of the Planning Institute of Australia.
Leave a Reply